dated

17.02.2012.

2

This petition coming on for Hearing this day, the

Court passed the following:

O R D E R

This revision petition is filed by the revision

petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 seeking to set aside the

judgment dated 18.09.2015 passed in Criminal Appeal

No.12/2012 by the learned III-Additional Sessions Judge,

Vijayapur, (hereinafter referred to as ‘First Appellate

Court’) and the judgment of conviction and order of

sentence dated 17.02.2012 passed by the learned Civil

Judge (Senior Division) and JMFC, Muddebihal, (hereinafter

referred to as ‘Trial Court’) in C.C.No.32/2009. Accused

No.1 is convicted for the offences under Sections 498-A

and 494 r/w Section 34 of IPC and sentenced him to

undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and

to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable

under Section 498-A r/w Section 34 of IPC and to undergo

imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of

Rs.2,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 494

r/w Section 34 of IPC, with default sentence. Accused

3

No.2 was convicted for the offence punishable under

Section 498-A r/w Section 34 of IPC and was sentenced to

undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one years

and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default sentence.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that, the informant

Smt. Sunita Pawar is the wife of accused No.1 and

daughter-in-law of accused No.2. Marriage between

accused No.1 and the informant is not in dispute. The

informant lodged first information on 31.10.2008 against

accused Nos.1 and 2 stating that about four years back

she married accused No.1 and they have begotten two

daughters. Accused No.1 was working as driver in BMTC.

After the marriage, she started residing in her matrimonial

home. For about one month, they looked after her well.

Thereafter, they started abusing and harassing her stating

that she is not good looking and she does not know

cooking. She was mentally and physically tortured. When

she informed this fact to her parents, her father and

brothers

came

and

convened

panchayat.

The

4

panchayatdars advised the accused. But, still they have

not improved their behaviour. Therefore, she requested

the police to register the case and to initiate legal action.

Accordingly, the police registered the case and took up

investigation. After investigation, charge sheet came to be

filed against accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences

punishable under Sections 498-A, 494 r/w Section 34 of

IPC.

3.

Both the accused appeared before the trial

Court and pleaded not guilty for the charges leveled

against them and they claimed to be tried. Thereafter, the

prosecution examined PWs.1 to 10 and got marked Exs.P1

to P3 in support is its contention. The Trial Court after

taking into consideration all these materials on record

came to the conclusion that the prosecution is successful in

proving the guilt of the accused No.1 for the offence

punishable under Sections 498-A and 494 r/w Section 34

of IPC, while the prosecution is successful in proving the

guilt of accused No.2 for the offence punishable under

5

Section 498-A r/w Section 34 of IPC. Accordingly, the

accused were convicted.

4.

Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction

and order of sentence passed by the Trial Court, both the

accused preferred appeal in Criminal Appeal No.12/2012

before the First Appellate Court. The First Appellate Court

after taking into consideration the materials placed before

the Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution is

successful in proving the guilt of the accused for the

offence punishable under Section 498-A r/w Section 34 of

IPC and accordingly, confirmed the said judgment of

conviction and order of sentence. However, it set aside

the conviction recorded against accused No.1 for the

offence punishable under Section 494 of IPC. The State

has not preferred any appeal against acquittal of accused

No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 494 of IPC.

5.

Accused Nos.1 and 2 have preferred this

revis